For 1) i know there is collusion between these two cause team a always asks team b for advice and looks to him. and i know that other teams have offered better players. I dont think i can allow this. what do u all think??

Regardless of the merits of the trade, this alone makes the trade vetoable.

ahh yes except he says he knows there collusion because Team A asks Team B for advice. That doesn't mean collusion. My friend asks me for advice all the time. We have made 3 trades this year already. Is that collusion? He also said teams have offered better deals but better deals to who? Don't you know that certain people like certain players more than others? I for one wouldn't touch Griffey-ever-but a lot of people like him and want him on their team. Besides the trade isn't at all lopsided anyway.

Regardless of the merits of the trade, this alone makes the trade vetoable.

that is a terrible thing to say. just cause there once has been collusion between two teams doesnt mean that a somewhat fair trade should be vetoed. This is not an unfair trade. Arod has been horrible, so his value drops to that of a second rounder. Jeter has been not great, so his value drops to that of a 7th rounder. Escobar has been not great, so his value is pretty low. Damon is solid, so his value is much greater than womack, even though womack is on fire. And then Beckett has been awsome, so he is somewhere around a 3rd rounder value-wise.

So what you have is a second-rounder and (lets say) two 12th rounders for a 3rd rounder and two seventh rounders. I say that is very fair.